'Often Satan injects pride into the believer's spirit, evoking in him an attitude of self-importance and of self-conceit. He causes him to esteem himself a very outstanding person, one who is indispensable in God's work. Such a spirit constitutes one of the major reasons for the fall of believers.' - Watchman Nee

I'm a bit confused here. I listened to Chan's sermon and am wondering how it can be interpreted as advocating a return to slavery and legalism. This seems off subject from what Chan addressed. Chan spoke of trying to maintain unity and defending brothers and sisters when they are carnally spoken against by other members of the Body. He spoke of not speaking ill so quickly of church leaders and not damaging what God has invested Himself in. Maybe though I misinterpret what you mean by the wrong application of Chan's words in the video. I didn't feel he was laying a heavy burden on my shoulders. If I am wrongly confused please help me.

This is true, and the article and sermon are a great reminder of the need to be careful with our thoughts and words concerning Christ's Body. At the same time it is necessary to recognize that there is a thin line between a critical spirit and a necessary discernment of the limitations of a religious system of doctrine and practice without the spiritual life of Christ at its heart.

The takeaway here is that despite the ruin we see in the church, we should not abandon the thought of ever seeing the church return to beginnings. I don't believe that God has appointed any other way to fulness in His people but by a corporate unity under the headship of the Holy Spirit. Let us pray fervently for that, for that is truly sacred.

Anton Bosch, in reply to Greg on another medium (facebook) writes......

"Chan's exegesis is correct, but his application is way off. Pointing out heresy as taught by Bethel, Bickle, Warren et al is not what is defiling the body but it is these men's heresy that is defiling and dividing. Chan should be warning them and should have nothing to do with them instead of defending them and threatening any who would dare to warn against their errors."

The notion that people's life are in danger if they challenge leadership is a well known cultish practice, typically in Charismatic circles, to nullify ant criticism, kindal like "touch not the Lord's anointed." The threat from Chan in his application is that if you were to challenge, say, Mike Bickle in any of his teachings, you would be in danger of being killed by God. We could extend this to folks like Todd Bentley and so on. And in fact, by application, this could have been used to silence Paul when he criticized Peter, publickly. We see a further misapplication in many of those circles, circles such as the prosperity gospels and so on, who use the mis-aplication of well known scriptures to feather their won nests and to silence any challenges to them.................bro Frank

Frank Mceleny Anton Bosch thanks Anton for sharing. I do believe we are in a place in the western christianity where we feel we have a right for any reason to accuse or speak against a brother in christ who even is in error in some way. This freedom has allowed for much damage and disunity to form. I believe that is Francis's heart. Of course if a leader is in previous errors especially other leaders of the church should speak with them but not via blogging rather in person with fasting and prayer.

"We feel we have a right for any reason to accuse or speak against a brother in christ "

No one has said that or even intimated that, simply a straw man by yourself Greg. Gross error is what we are talking about, examples being of the ones Anton mentioned, the very ones Chan said not to criticize. The good thing is that those baptized in the Holy Spirit have a particular gift from God, the love of the truth. The opposite of that would be men who promote themselves to other men and in fact have a fear of man. Better to offend men than to offend the living God, this is even why we had a reformation, for given your own stance and Chan's, criticizing the Catholic church would have meant death. It did indeed mean death for so many, but not by God, but by foolish deceived men thinking they were doing God a service............Bro Frank

To me there is an irony in all this. The text quoted about warning certain people in the church to cease destroying God’s temple was rightfully spoken to correct spiritual backbiting and strife caused by certain members of the body and was spoken by Paul in rebuke and corrective criticism of the body of Christ. I don’t think anyone would suggest Paul was wrong to rebuke the body when it was functioning in sinful unChristlike behaviors. You would have to excise major portions of Scripture warning the churches of errant and destructive practices and paths to follow the arguments being posited. I think the application of the text is overly and unnecessarily broad.

"You would have to excise major portions of Scripture warning the churches of errant and destructive practices and paths to follow the arguments being posited. I think the application of the text is overly and unnecessarily broad."

This of course is true and indeed was Anton's point. Unscrupulous men have used various applications of this down through the ages to assert their authority and to shield themselves from criticism............bro Frank

This of course is true and indeed was Anton's point. Unscrupulous men have used various applications of this down through the ages to assert their authority and to shield themselves from criticism............bro Frank

Unfortunately this is not true as there is first nothing wrong with Church authority and leadership. Submission to leadership in the Church is very important and those who do not want to submit are also those who feel free to say anything they want at anytime against anyone they feel they want to.

Essentially if we are not willing to follow God's pattern of Church then we are a church unto ourselves. That is part of the premise of what Chan is saying also. In another message I quote him speaking on handing over to satan:

"There is this terrifying verse in 1 Timothy where Paul talked about two men who rejected the faith. Paul said that he had handed them over to Satan, by which he meant that he'd put them outside of the church (1:20). Basically, these men were actively opposing the works of God, so rather than pretending everything was fine, Paul removed them from the safety and blessings of the fellowship of believers. He was hoping that the misery of being separated from the church would lead them to repent. Are you catching the weight of this? Paul equated removal from the church with being handed over to Satan! It is crazy to me that we live in a time when people are voluntarily doing this to themselves! No church has placed them outside of the fellowship; instead, they've handed themselves over to Satan!" from: https://www.charismanews.com/opinion/74157-francis-chan-are-you-destroying-the-church

His conclusion is powerful. Those in the ancient Church were excluded as a last resort of discipline, but people in our day in America choose to leave churches on their own because in their own minds they are right and most others wrong.

Correction in the New Testament was done via leaders to leaders not anyone just hurling a stone. It was always done in wisdom and through the proper channels of Church leadership. I wrote a series of articles on this very topic as many use Matthew 18 to declare they can start a blog to a brother who will not reply to their email and then slander that leader in the Church with many accusations and condemnations.

Another straw man and a deflection, biblical leadership is a beautiful thing. Greg further writes......

Essentially if we are not willing to follow God's pattern of Church then we are a church unto ourselves."

Now this I agree with, we only have to look at the vast majority of churches and denominations and leaders to see folks who are a church unit themselves, unless you can give examples among them of 1 Cor 14 churches. This is God's pattern............bro Frank

I understand brother Greg’s point and agree for the most part. But, what you leave no room for is the prophetic and for the watchman. Like all things of the Spirit, there will be the true and the false imitation. Ecclesiastical authority is not always the measure. Prophets are to assess the prophetic. I am quoting Scripture so I feel confident in this statement.